Jump to content
  • 0
FairreLilette

Which Do You Prefer COPY or TRANSFER?

Question

Regarding non full perm items, which do you prefer...COPY or TRANSFER?

1)  Furnishings. 

COPY or TRANSFER?  

With copy you can copy as many chairs as you want for example.  But, with transfer, you could have your own little yard sale when you want to re-decorate or sell your items.

2)  Clothing.

COPY or TRANSFER?

With copy, you can make little outfits with the outfit feature.  With transfer, you can have a yard sale when you are tired of your old clothes.

So which do you prefer?  

 

 

Edited by FairreLilette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0
15 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

On occasion, yes. I even rescued one customer who was sitting on her sofa outside her skybox.

Any point to that question?

ETA: An anecdote. I once spent about 30 minutes with one customer trying to help her. During it, she said, "You must think I'm stupid". I did, but I didn't tell her that. In the end I gave up because she just couldn't grasp it at all. I couldn't even get her to left-click the object.

Another ETA, and this is also to Theresa. Don't forget that I was selling for profit, and earning as much as I could. It was a business, not a shared experience. So all these little questions are a bit silly, don't you think?

How does selling 2 copies of a sofa mean you need to spend more time supporting it than if you sold 1 copy to someone.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
3 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

Correction: I do care

is a hollow claim and is beside the point and it really does not show in anything you said so far so nice try 
we are not talking from an opinion ....only you do i never did
as a matter of fact i have been speaking of objective facts and stating a logical argument thus far you are the one with over 5 logical fallacies 
from red herring fallacy to an equivocation fallacy to straw man fallacy to to true Scotsmen fallacy  that was your argument....so no... its really a cute try but it just does not work  

Edited by vvvRavenvvv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
3 minutes ago, Hintswen Guardian said:

How does selling 2 copies of a sofa mean you need to spend more time supporting it than if you sold 1 copy to someone.

double the chance to break it and no option to rez a new unbroken copy... it's a hardwired follow up of the "no copy" paradigma...

Edited by Fionalein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 minute ago, Hintswen Guardian said:

How does selling 2 copies of a sofa mean you need to spend more time supporting it than if you sold 1 copy to someone.

Don't be so argumentative. Two customers - 2x customer service. And don't forget the significant amount of money it costs to run a large store. Also, don't forget that businesses are in business for profit.

Look. Everyone (well almost everyone) agrees that there is no right or wrong about it. So stop being argumentative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

But you wouldn't buy an RL sofa, or chair, or table, etc. and expect to be able to place one of them in every room.

I doesn't matter anyway. There's no disagreement because everyone can choose to sell with whatever perms they want, and everyone can choose to buy with whatever perms they want. Nobody can argue against that - well almost nobody lol.

How does buying a RL sofa correlate to buying a SL sofa. The exampled I used are digital licenses for a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

Don't be so argumentative.

no you need to stop being stubborn and speaking from ignorant YOU your Self Said you support your products which i debunked 2 pages ago WOOULLLLDDD  like me to copy paste it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 minute ago, Phil Deakins said:

Don't be so argumentative. Two customers - 2x customer service. And don't forget the significant amount of money it costs to run a large store. Also, don't forget that businesses are in business for profit.

Look. Everyone (well almost everyone) agrees that there is no right or wrong about it. So stop being argumentative.

Yes but you replied to Theresa Tennyson's comment about "something for nothing" being someone wanting something (more lindens) for nothing (multiple copies of the same thing which cost you no more to produce than the original outlay when you designed and made the product) saying that running a large inworld store costs a significant amount. How does a customer having multiple copies of an item increase your costs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Just now, Hintswen Guardian said:

Yes but you replied to Theresa Tennyson's comment about "something for nothing" being someone wanting something (more lindens) for nothing (multiple copies of the same thing which cost you no more to produce than the original outlay when you designed and made the product) saying that running a large inworld store costs a significant amount. How does a customer having multiple copies of an item increase your costs?

Ok. You seem intent on being argumentative just for the sake so, you think what you want to think, and I'll think what I want to think. You don't have to agree. Ok?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

The examples you used were RL products. I replied with another RL product example. Easy ;)

The examples I used were a game (which you may get a CD/DVD for but it is still a digital product you can install on multiple computers or play on multiple consoles) and a digital album. Please do go on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
13 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

Ok. You seem intent on being argumentative just for the sake so, you think what you want to think, and I'll think what I want to think. You don't have to agree. Ok?

 

16 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

The examples you used were RL products. I replied with another RL product example. Easy ;)

WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO COPY PASTE how those two claims were debunked ? do you just call every logical argument that you cant poke holes in to argumentative as a way of throwing the game and winning by default ? grow up , facts dont care for how you feel

you have been recycling the same talk over and over and over as if we are all too stupid to understand and see what you mean while we have been applying basic logic against it and it does not seem to work , its time you say some thing new or give it up 

Edited by vvvRavenvvv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I've got several televisions that are all digital products - and all RL products ;) Perhaps I should have used a television as an example instead of a sofa lol. Ok. Change my example from sofa to television.

Edited by Phil Deakins
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
4 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

I've got several televisions that are all digital products - and all RL products ;) Perhaps I should have used a television as an example instead of a sofa lol.

the factory made it using real plastic they had to pay real machines that use electricity which is energy THAT IS A CURRENCY in this day an age which comes from burning material just like the ones in making it to make and plastic tubes which cost money to make refine and bring all the way to the factory then payed the staff of all of those and transportation and trade fees and sooooo ooooonnn


mean while a TV in SL is few hours on a program for modeling and maybe the same amount of hours  on texturing and THEN  you can sell it endless time without having to make the same tv over and over and over and over  and without all the physical requirements to make every copy STOP the stupidity please  

Edited by vvvRavenvvv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
15 minutes ago, Hintswen Guardian said:

The examples I used were a game (which you may get a CD/DVD for but it is still a digital product you can install on multiple computers or play on multiple consoles) and a digital album. Please do go on.

by the logic of this phill brain dead guy we need to pay the singer of the song every time we play it on the car radio...LOL  he is KILLING ME with IGNORANT and i love how every one is arguing that its his opinion he is free to share it NO ITS NOT !


OPINION VS FACT IS STUPID AND SHOULD NOT BE ENCOURAGED 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I prefer copy over transfer.  However, if I really like something and it is not copy I will still buy it.  

As for Phil,  he is allowed to sell his items anyway he chooses, whether they are copy or not.  No one is being forced to buy non-copy items and I am sure no one was forced to buy his products.   I don't agree with his reasoning for making it non-copy, but to each their own.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
6 minutes ago, karynmaria said:

I prefer copy over transfer.  However, if I really like something and it is not copy I will still buy it.  

As for Phil,  he is allowed to sell his items anyway he chooses, whether they are copy or not.  No one is being forced to buy non-copy items and I am sure no one was forced to buy his products.   I don't agree with his reasoning for making it non-copy, but to each their own.

i love the way you put it but he claims his reasons are infallible simply because they are his opinion and that there is no right and wrong while actively calling us greedy for debunking his so called '' argument of a reason '' and at the same time committing almost every logical fallacy how dare some one even claims that ? what are we even doing in the forum ?

this  guy made more logical fallacies then the ontological argument some one needs to document this for further study its fascinating how some one can ride his opinion all the way across his twisted view of the world and land face first and call it a win  because as he claims we are all '' argumentative for the sake or arguing '' JUST WONDERFUL 

Edited by vvvRavenvvv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
45 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

Two customers - 2x customer service.

 this costumer service you speak of is optional in SL there is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO PRODUCT COSTUMER SERVICE for created items in SL there are only kind creators OTHER WISE there would be legal lines for it and i am sure the folk at LL Can add a functunal system for it if that was the case but they trust us users to have the common sense to get that much... YOU ON THE OTHER HAND 
...you.......

 a '' creator '' who wanna be '' seem kind '' for following up on a costumer after having an issue of which you FOUNDED on PURPOSE and THEN  wanna label it as costumer service and wanna be called Kind for ... take that some where else 

Edited by vvvRavenvvv
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
47 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

I've got several televisions that are all digital products - and all RL products ;) Perhaps I should have used a television as an example instead of a sofa lol. Ok. Change my example from sofa to television.

A RL TV is not a digital product, it is a physical product just like a RL Sofa is. A sofa on SL however is purely digital. It is stored digitally it is reproduced digitally, it costs to make extra copies of it due to it being a digital product (excluding the cost to LL storing the data as to who owns copies, how many etc.)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

Now that's really odd. My copy has the same fault, and I never knew. I don't know exactly what was said between us at the time but I do know that I would never have told a customer to "Fix it yourself". The overall meaning would have been that you can adjust it, but not the bluntness of 'fix it yourself'. That was just you having a go for some reason that's unknown to me. I can imagine that the conversation led me to think that it was merely an adjustment to fit both avatars, which is normal, and tell you to read the notecard to see how to adjust it. That's usually necessary anyway, due to avatars being of varying heights. I would definitely not have known there was a fault and left it on sale without dealing with it. That never happened.

I'm sorry that there was a fault, but I can say with absolute certainty that, whatever was said between us, I did not come to understand that there was an actual fault, or I would have dealt with it by fixing the store copy and swapping yours. The fact that my copy still has the fault is proof enough for me.

It's been a very long time since I used positioning balls in my stuff, and things have moved on a lot. So it's highly unlikely that you'd want to exchange yours for the no-balls version (which doesn't contain that fault), but you can have an exchange if you want it. If you're likely to use it again, or pass it on, it would be best to exchange, because you didn't edit the .POSITIONS notecard when you adjusted the positions, and every time it's Reset, the original wrong position will be back.

Our conversation was by IM - you may have a record of it somewhere. I believe I still do but its on an old computer. I'm sure I wasn't extremely helpful; in fact if I remember right my initial contact was annoyingly twee. However, I think I at least tried to point out that there was a significant issue with it (which, as you can now see, there was) and you didn't bother to even check your product at the time. You didn't mean to say, "fix it yourself," but in this instance that's essentially what you did say.

Note that when I brought this up again in this thread your immediate reaction was that I was "lying." (Note that I didn't say what the problem was, I said what somebody told you the problem was, which happened to be technically wrong but it did describe the symptoms.) Then there was a post or two where you said that it was me messing it up myself or not understanding the animation. We had to go through all that for you to entertain the possibility that there really was a problem.

People have told you over and over in these forums that you will almost never admit that you're wrong. Well, that's the way you are and that's not likely to change at this point in your life. It's not a great trait for someone in the customer service business, though, and that's why I brought it up when you started talking about people paying you for your white-glove customer service.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

And a CD/DVD is a physical product. Both of them use software <sigh>. To recap, you cited a couple of RL example, and I cited an RL example in response. You don't have a reasonable argument about that.

About selling no-copy items in SL, I'll repeat that you have your opinions and I have mine. That's just the way it is. You believe you are right, and I believe I am right . You can't persuade me and I can't persuade you. What more is there to say?

 

I wonder if the guy who thinks that selling no-copy items is illegal realises that I never see his posts because he's on ignore. I do see that he's posted though lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
11 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

And a CD/DVD is a physical product. Both of them use software <sigh>. To recap, you cited a couple of RL example, and I cited an RL example in response. You don't have a reasonable argument about that.

About selling no-copy items in SL, I'll repeat that you have your opinions and I have mine. That's just the way it is. You believe you are right, and I believe I am right . You can't persuade me and I can't persuade you. What more is there to say?

no one said its illegal we just said you are making an equivocation fallacy ....look it up 
also people dont charge for the software you are speaking from ignorant they are charging for the content with in the said software i urge you not to talk about things  you dont know much about we will only point out that you are ignorant which you have been reinforcing by arguing endlessly 
here is an example of what your argument sounds like to logical human beings when you use the word Copy the way you do 
1200-609478-meaning-of-equivocation-fall

Edited by vvvRavenvvv
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
44 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Our conversation was by IM - you may have a record of it somewhere. I believe I still do but its on an old computer. I'm sure I wasn't extremely helpful; in fact if I remember right my initial contact was annoyingly twee. However, I think I at least tried to point out that there was a significant issue with it (which, as you can now see, there was) and you didn't bother to even check your product at the time. You didn't mean to say, "fix it yourself," but in this instance that's essentially what you did say.

I've had more than one new computer since then, so I don't have a record of the IMs.

"Essentially" what I said is not the same as actually saying it. But you initially said that it's what I said, and that was a lie. Now you're admitting it. In the post that you replied to, I said what the conversation probably was, which amounts to you can adjust the positions yourself. You'd need to do that anyway. The fact that my copy still has the fault satisfies me that I was never aware that a fault actually existed. Note that I could have lied about the fault still being in my copy, but I'm honest.

Note that when I brought this up again in this thread your immediate reaction was that I was "lying."

You were lying. You said I told you to fix it yourself, which was an extreme slanting of what actually happened. So extreme that it amounted to a lie. And you warped it in an attempt to put me down.

(Note that I didn't say what the problem was, I said what somebody told you the problem was, which happened to be technically wrong but it did describe the symptoms.) Then there was a post or two where you said that it was me messing it up myself or not understanding the animation. We had to go through all that for you to entertain the possibility that there really was a problem.

It was only yesterday. Surely you can remember what was written in these posts. You ought to remember that I didn't say that it was you messing it up yourself. Either you really have forgotten, or you are lying again. I don't need to check to know that I suggested that that might have been the case, and that I definitely didn't say that it was the case. I wrote a couple of possibilities, and that was one of them.

People have told you over and over in these forums that you will almost never admit that you're wrong.

I don't believe anyone has ever said that. What people do sometimes say is that I never admit that I am wrong - not "almost never". The thing is that it takes to disagree, each of them believing that they are right. It's not rare for me to admit to being wrong, but I'm not wrong in this case. You made a clear statement which was so warped about an event, that it was a lie. I'm not wrong about selling no-copy items either. Apart from one guy who actually thinks that it's both illegal and immoral, nobody says I'm wrong about that. They all say that I have every right sell items with whatever I choose. Some disagree with my choice (which, incidentally, was the norm when I was selling), but nobody says that I'm wrong to do it.

The only thing in this thread where people say that I'm wrong, is 'greed'. I have a different opinion to those that have been expressed here. That's just one thing, but it's my opinion, so I'm not likely to say that it's wrong, am I?

On the other hand, you were absolutely wrong to make the statement you did. Will you admit it?

Well, that's the way you are and that's not likely to change at this point in your life. It's not a great trait for someone in the customer service business, though, and that's why I brought it up when you started talking about people paying you for your white-glove customer service.

We are all as we are ;) And, to refresh your apparently not very good memory, I am not in the customer service business. I am not in any sort of business. I used to provide excellent customer service when I was in business. That was back in the days when no-copy furniture was the norm.

Tip: You really should get your facts right when jumping into something with accusations, because they may not turn out to be correct, as you found in this case.

ETA: This is what you wrote:-

" Then there was the customer who told you that a pose in a poseball had been put in upside down and you told them to fix it themselves and you kept selling the product with the inverted pose."

It comes across like this:-

Customer: "I just bought a rug from you but one of the poses is upside down"

Me: "Fix it yourself"

Such an extreme slant was intentionally put on the conversation between us that it became an actual lie.

I can still prove to you beyond a reasonable doubt that the conversation between us did not cause me to understand that there was an actual fault. You remember what the fault was, and you can reproduce it by Resetting the rug, causing it to return. I can show you my copy and it will have the identical fault, even though all you've told be about is that one of the positions was upside down. You haven't told me which one, and you haven't told me in what way it was upside down, and yet your rug and mine will show identical positions. It is perfectly reasonable to accept that, when a seller knows that there's a fault, s/he will fix so that future buyers won't have it.

Edited by Phil Deakins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
16 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

Tip: You really should get your facts right when jumping into something with accusations, because they may not turn out to be correct, as you found in this case.

ETA: This is what you wrote:-

" Then there was the customer who told you that a pose in a poseball had been put in upside down and you told them to fix it themselves and you kept selling the product with the inverted pose."

It comes across like this:-

Customer: "I just bought a rug from you but one of the poses is upside down"

Me: "Fix it yourself"

Such an extreme slant was intentionally put on the conversation between us that it became an actual lie.

I said something to the effect that there was a problem with the pose positions. As you can now see, it was a significant problem caused by a technical flaw. You said I should take care of this significant problem that I was seeing by adjusting the positions myself. How is this not saying "Fix it yourself"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×